I dont think it is rubbish at all.

If children learn that death is a part of life, and that punishment for your crimes is very real, they grow up better able to deal with reality.

When they are sheltered from all the negative aspects of life and only find out about them in the abstract, well....lets just say I dont believe that has beneficial results in the long term.

__________________
In case you were wondering, yes, there really ARE more idiots these days....technology has made natural selection obsolete.

Well, unfortunately I disagree with you, and wont mince words here. It's one thing to believe an adult should get the death penalty, but saying that more kids should watch executions is pure bunk. There is no reason for children to have to actually watch someone else being killed. Children aren't emotionally equipped to handle that type of stuff - I'm not even sure most adults are.
Not everyone revels in watching this kinda stuff. Children are not ready for it anyway.

By the way, I did not say they should be sheltered from everything, but at the same time I don't think we should make them watch more executions - that is going way overboard.

Did, and actually meant something different - my apologies.

Did I ever say I want to use the government to force my views upon others?

I didn't even post an opinion here in the first place ... lol

Why? Scared straight programs could work. Maybe Rahul was an immature child or plans on raising immature children?

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

I don’t know…….I think children should be left out from watching….For one, if a said child grew up watching public executions, I’d think that it would emotionally program them to where they wouldn’t bat an eye over it……Look at the other nations where war is a part of growing up, the kids have and are using guns and they also have no fear of dieing………Then again, there are kid street gangs that are already killing, raping and such…….this one would be a tough choice IMO.

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

Many times I believe Americans will have to take back the country and start a new government.

I agree with that.....as long as it's in a controlled environment tuned to teaching a lesson about crime and punishment. There are too many young people who believe there are no consequences to their actions, and this is one way to impress upon their young minds that there is.

If I could change the way the law deals with children who commit adult crimes, they should do an adult sentence for an adult crime......like murder, rape, armed robbery, and many others. It would be hard to pinpoint an age where a child should face a death sentence, but if he knows the difference between right and wrong, he should. I doubt that there are very many children who don't know that killing someone else is WRONG.....past, oh, say, about 8 or 10yrs old. If it's done with malice, the little criminal should pay the same price that an adult would. Now, I know I'm going to get some outcries from the bleeding hearts about that one, but the fact is......these murdering children MUST be aware that there is a price to pay for capitol crimes.....and if they see others in their age group paying the price, it will be a lesson they won't forget.

hogthink

__________________
.
Visit my military photo album, Vietnam 68-69....

http://www.picturetrail.com/taipan22alpha

I'll agree with what you said....But the only problem that I can think of is the bad parent syndrome, too many parents (if you can call them that) just aren't teaching kids right from wrong...Then again, as you said, kids over 11 yrs of age "know" whats right from wrong regardless of their parents.

But I do agree though, kids that commit murder and such should face adult punishment....There should be no exceptions........a life for a life !

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

Many times I believe Americans will have to take back the country and start a new government.

OK, here's my take.

1. I beleive there are people who can not be rehabilitated, and others that we don't dare take a chance on rehabilitating them.

2. in both cases, they are not only a loss to society, but a drudge on society. FURTHER, the death penalty is usually reserved for those who commit murder. In my opinion there are things worse than murder. Example Larry Singleton who cut off the arms of a young girl and left her for dead, and Chas Rathenburger who poured gasoline on his young son and then set him on fire Both Children survived, the girl with no arms, and the boy horribly scarred. The "PUNISHMENT" for both should be death. And I for one would have no objection to pulling the switch.

3, Then there are those who are incarserated for life, with no possibility of parole. tho it would be voluntary, they should be allowed to choose "Kavorian Style" death over imprisonment if they so desire. This would be a bennefit to the Public if they so chose.

4. Please note; that none of these are based on Religious principles But on logical proprities.

5. But I do beleive that the death penalty should be carried out in the least painful way possible. , there is no need for phyical revenge

6. I also beleive that only those who have been proven guilty beyond "ANY" doubt and/ or have confessed, etc should be eligible for the death penalty.

You're a hard man McGee. Your idea smacks of strict revenge. I thought Humanity was supposed to alleviate that

You consider what you wish, Hopefully the rest of us are more reasonable.

Yes, I for one noticed, and I can undersdtand your delemna, but I have to put myself outside the moral querstion and answere the logic question which states that when the individual is valueless and/or represents a trheat to another person, we need to take adequate steps.

You must remenber that even in prison, there are murders, and if it were only the other inmates, it would be one thing, but also the people guarding and/or adminstering to them are in danger.

Certainly not as immature as the "adult" who wants kids to be watching more and more executions.

Doniston, I agree. There are both moral and logical issues to consider - I guess I brought up the moral issues first.

I agree that people who burn their kids alive or rape young kids (just some examples) or blow up buildings in the name of religion don't deserve any sympathy. Your other point also has it's merits.

So ... I'd say your post about sums up how I feel myself, but without the blooduthirsty part - i.e. public executions, or the extremist part - i.e. making kids watch more executions.

What is the person is proven to be insane? What would be your stance then? I would say lock him up (in the loony bin) instead of the electric chair - but am open to other ideas ... (meaning I'm not stating my opinion to start an argument from that viewpoint!).

I used to be a firm death penalty proponent until I practiced criminal law in the courts first as a clerk and then as an attorney. When you see the whole process every day, you get to know it is a human one, and that naturally will make mistakes and/or make the wrong guess at verdict. Mind you, the overwhelming number of people get convicted of crimes because they did it, but enough errors get made to raise pause on imposing the ultimate penalty--death.

Alot of times, guilt and innocence are simply an strong educated strong guess (conviction requires guilt beyond a reasobale doubt, not all doubt) when it comes to circumstantial and testimonial evidence, and it's always filled with bias---usually against the defendant because when everyone is pointing their fingers at someone and offering evidence that they did it, the very understandable and most often correct assumption is that they did do it.

When I worked as a clerk for a judge, I worked on a file involving a man who has been given life imprisonment for killing a young paperboy in a henious crime. The only reason he did not get the death penalty is because the SCOTUS had declared the practice unconstitutional at that time he was convicted. I remember advising the court of my concerns that the case looked questionable but they did not agree, and it seemed alot the defendant's perceived lack of character that suggested he did it played a role in the cynicism of the defendant's claims. After I entered private practice, the defendant was released due to new evidence surfacing that showed his innocence. But the defendant had already lost over 20 years of his life in prison, and he would have been a prime candidate for a death penalty case had it been in effect when he was first convicted.

Then there was this guy Nicholas Yarris. He was convicted of stalking and killing a young woman, and he was given the death penalty. I even felt he likely did it. But, new DNA evidence showed he did not commit the crime and he was released. Yet, he lost over 20 years in prison and would have been executed for a crime he did not commit had the new evidence not cleared him.

I also learnt over the years in this business that life imprisonment is often times the harder punishment although mentally few defendants can bring themselves to choose death, although some do by stopping their appeals. Death really is the easier way out from life on maximum security. And it can get worse that just maximum. Life 'in the hole' on maximum for bad offenders is even worse. And then there is 'supermax.' The fact that Zacarias Moussauoi was sentenced to life imprisonment on 'supermax' instead of death is a horrendously harsh imposition that will guarantee a life of misery, and it denied him an easier more desired way out.

The appeals process in death penalty cases also mostly take so many years and so much money and resources that the process winds up costing more than just imposing life imprisonment and winds up taking the sting out of the punishment as well as its deterrent value through the often decades long delay.

Therefore today, I now oppose it in principle.

That said, I still don't loose sleep over an imposition of the death penalty in cases involving premeditated murder with aggravated circumstances where guilt is shown beyond all doubt (a case not built entirely on circumstantial evidence and with evidence of such reliability that guilt is beyond any question). There are a laundry list of other issues that I feel are more deserving than whether such kinds of convicts deserve life in prison or the death penalty. They are extremely unsympathetic cases and not deserving of any cause celebre.

I also think life should mean life in premeditated murder cases--no parole for premeditated murderers.

One thing I am absolutely sickened to death seeing outside the US in many places is the light prison time that killers get for their crimes. Quite frankly, that is worse by comparison.

In many Western countries, a cold blooded killer can be released after 10-15 years, give or take 5 years in either directions of that range. To me, that is absolutely disgusting. It's a direct and egregious disrespect to the victims, presents an undue endangerment to society, breeds contempt for law and order with law abiding citizens, and serves as an incentive for law breaking citizens to break the law, including with murder.

Well, humanity hasn't stopped murders, child molesters and rapist......Actually it's gotten worse since our laws have gotten soft on those crimes.....I think until a better solution comes along, we do things a little different.

__________________
Anyone who thinks freedom comes cheap, please put the blindfold on and stand against the wall.

Many times I believe Americans will have to take back the country and start a new government.